The Bealtes - new Box set out for per-order now !!!
Jul 11, 2009 at 9:25 PM Post #31 of 189
Quote:

Originally Posted by Pangaea /img/forum/go_quote.gif
That makes sense, thanks. I have Pet Sounds in both mono and stereo, came as a set and I never bothered to listen to the mono. Now I will have to check it out.


Pet Sounds is an album I prefer in mono.
 
Jul 11, 2009 at 9:38 PM Post #32 of 189
It also bears stating that the Beatles themselves had a much greater hand in the production and mixing of the albums in mono, to the extent they had a hand in it at all.

If you're looking for the "authentic" version, mono is it on most of the earlier recordings. I personally enjoy the mono albums a great deal, especially considering how ham fisted much of the stereo was. Lead vocals mixed far left, anyone?
 
Jul 11, 2009 at 9:50 PM Post #34 of 189
Quote:

Originally Posted by linuxworks /img/forum/go_quote.gif
so, you think that LIMITING is ever, EVER a good thing, given that the recordings came from an era that already had too much limiting and not enough dyn range, as it is?

the give-away is there in english. what do I need to listen to? they TELL us its compressed more than the previous releases.

that is a show-stopper for me. no, don't need to listen to know that much! don't need to burn my hand, either, to know when its not going to be a good experience
wink.gif


if you want to re-re-rebuy the white album again, on a cash-grab from big music, be my guest.


Words cannot express how inane this post is. I will instead allow Picard to do it as only he can:

picard-facepalm.jpg
 
Jul 11, 2009 at 10:16 PM Post #35 of 189
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sherwood /img/forum/go_quote.gif

Moreover, as noted, the mono versions have no limiting. Aside from three albums recorded in stereo (one of which sucks IMO), you're getting the real deal, "cleaned up" as you asked for. Any reason why you'll pass on the monos? After all, the Beatles recorded in mono, and engineers created stereo.


you may have a point. I had forgotton about the strangeness of the l/r mixes they had on some earlier albums. I don't listen to their older stuff as much. but yeah, the mono's could *only* be better just for what you state
wink.gif


I really would like cleaned up stuff, but dyn range limits are a no-no with me and I can't see funding that. that's what a purchase is, its an 'ok, I agree and here's my money' vote. I can't do that knowing they mucked around with the dyn range 'for modern trend reasons'. I can't be part of that.

but if the monos are *only* improved, that could be worth something
wink.gif


don't know why they have to split things into false dichotomies, though. it should *not* have to be an either/or thing. if they admit they didn't touch the loudness of the monos, why the heck mess with it on stereo? boggle!

I've played around with 'fixing' music that has flaws (like live DAT tapes before making a clean cd of them) and I would NEVER EVER reduce or compress if its already in a compressed form. and given the fact that no dyn range compression is needed in order to 'contain' a 1960's era master tape on redbook cd, any compression they apply is not only unnecessary, but absurd to even imagine. one step forward and one back is not worth anything to me; its a net zero.
 
Jul 11, 2009 at 11:03 PM Post #37 of 189
Quote:

Originally Posted by linuxworks /img/forum/go_quote.gif
don't know why they have to split things into false dichotomies, though. it should *not* have to be an either/or thing. if they admit they didn't touch the loudness of the monos, why the heck mess with it on stereo? boggle!


I have a guess, and I wager my guess is the same as yours. Monos are for purists, and stereos are for the majority of the cd-buying public.

Without having heard them, I can't say what they'll sound like. I agree that I was offput by their "limiting", but my vote will be decided by the quality of the recordings themselves. If they're the best available, then they're the best available. The perfect is the enemy of the good, here.
 
Jul 12, 2009 at 2:23 AM Post #38 of 189
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sherwood /img/forum/go_quote.gif
The perfect is the enemy of the good, here.


That is often true in this hobby/love affair of ours, and easy to forget.
 
Jul 12, 2009 at 3:03 AM Post #39 of 189
Quote:

Originally Posted by scytheavatar /img/forum/go_quote.gif
You are getting the original 13 remastered + "past masters". And it's not like all 13 Beatles albums are masterpieces; Yellow Submarine is an absolute pile of turd, Please Please Me, With The Beatles and Beatles For Sale are not bad but they are filler when you compare to the rest of their works. Kind of like Beethoven's first 2 Symphonies.


I have to respectfully disagree.....Yellow Submarine isn't a Beatles album, but its a soundtrack to their movie with only 4 new songs, and a lot of classical soundtrack.

Please Please Me is a masterpiece of course. With The Beatles, Hard Day's Night, Beatles For Sale, Help.....all masterpieces........... Of all the Beatles albums, Hard Days Night has undoubtedly the most continuously famous material. Beatles For Sale is the Beatles most bluesy album great stuff, Please Please Me is one of the 10 greatest debuts in rock and has continuously famous material.

Rubber Soul is their first piece of art, but it's not their first masterful achievement to me.
 
Jul 12, 2009 at 3:26 AM Post #43 of 189
Quote:

Originally Posted by riceboy /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Just preordered my Mono box set
smily_headphones1.gif



As my old Turkish students would have said..

"Teacher, I am jealousing to you"
 
Jul 12, 2009 at 5:04 AM Post #44 of 189
Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidMahler /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Rubber Soul is their first piece of art, but it's not their first masterful achievement to me.


This could be fun; what do you think is?
 
Jul 12, 2009 at 8:42 AM Post #45 of 189
Just preordered the mono. I knew that I wouldn't be able to resisit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top